Factors Influencing the Development of Capacity

While there is little practical experience of capacity building approaches which specifically aim to strengthen organisational analysis and adaptation, we can suggest that there are both enabling and constraining factors which may influence the development of these capacities. The extent to which analytical and adaptive capacities are influenced by these factors may differ between cultures and contexts. These factors are summarised in the diagram below, and then briefly described.

􀂃 Flexible Space for Experimentation:
Developing relationships of trust both between individuals and groups within the organisation, and between the organisation and its stakeholders, is key to enabling flexible ways of working which promote the generation of ideas and initiatives. This requires creating the space (both in terms of time and resources) for learning which encourages experimentation and risk-taking. Creating specific collective spaces, such as action learning sets63 or communities of practice, whether formally or informally can support these processes.
􀂃 Supportive Leadership:
The role of leadership is central. Leaders may need to let go of some control, stimulate collective analytical and adaptive processes, and include staff more in the decision-making processes. Leaders also need to encourage staff to express their view, take risks without fear of failure and act upon relevant ideas. Effective leaders are captivated by learning. They are constantly on the lookout for new ways to enhance their ability to learn. A study of top NGO leaders in South Asia revealed that they ‘had a fascination with knowledge and learning … What has been striking has been the ability of their founder leaders to change and adapt’64. Rather than wait until they are forced to change by circumstance, effective leaders change ahead of time’65.
􀂃 Dynamic Group Interaction:
In the complex situations which characterise most systems, no one individual is likely to possess a complete understanding of that system and its challenges. Developing group interactions within an organisation can combine different perspectives and draw on a wider knowledge base to define proactive responses66. Triggered by perceived needs for adaptation or innovation, groupings may form in which organisational members adopt different roles and functions to serve a particular purpose for a limited period of time. If no relevant groups are in place, this may lead to the organic formation of loosely coupled structures.
􀂃 Horizontal Communication and Co-ordination
Processes of collective analysis frequently take place in isolated groups within the organisation, and may not lead to proactive organisational adaptation. Communication and co-ordination mechanisms are therefore important for linking analysis to effective adaptation. In hierarchical organisations with top down management, formal co-ordination mechanisms and communication channels may be relatively easy to manage. However, the decision-makers at the top may not have access to more informal information, or stimulate creative ideas and innovative
initiatives undertaken through horizontal interaction between staff. This suggests that it is not enough to build the analytical and adaptive capacity of individual staff members. It is also important to ensure that mechanisms are in place which allow for information to be shared and collectively analysed in a co-ordinated way, such as communities of practice or action learning sets.
􀂃 Locally Developed Conceptual Models
Many of the concepts and methods used by donors are not based on local needs. However, many local CSOs are expected to apply these methods as part of funding requirements despite the methodological difficulties they might face, or the fact that the approaches do not correspond to their local logic or ways of working67. These approaches may not even be implemented according to donor expectations, since the local organisation may interpret the concepts based on its own mental model, rather than that of the donors. Developing the capacity of CSOs to capture and simplify complexity without losing an understanding of the interconnectedness and dynamics of the system may help them to develop a more consensual conceptual basis for a programme with their stakeholders. The use of locally appropriate proverbs, stories, metaphors or analogies may facilitate this68.
􀂃 Supportive Donor Environment:
Donors could play a significant role in creating an enabling environment for CSOs to integrate processes of analysis and adaptation which involve a deeper level of learning in their ways of working. For this to improve organisational effectiveness, donors may need to reduce their requirements for pre-selected outcomes based on relatively rigid project frameworks and encourage more space for learning and flexibility to adjust actions. This may involve directly funding experimental activities, promoting ‘innovation zones’ which encourage some risk-taking and/or allowing for more flexibility to adjust actions as projects progress.